Talk:Master Ash
? Okay - I'm adding this to the Talk section.? I came over to this page and found it very...disturbing. I realize someone probably spent a lot time flushing out their Master Ash/Cinder theory on this particular page.? But IMO its really not appropriate for the Wiki.? In fact - its just freakin' stupid. I mean I love the Master Ash/Cinder theory - its great, I love theorizing, but putting this on the wiki...seriously?? It's just messy and doesnt tell you anything about Master Ash actually.? If no one speaks up and objects within the next couple of days... I'm going to delete it....for reals man. Ivorydoom (talk) 00:36, November 24, 2012 (UTC) :I object. Several people have contributed to this page and you haven't provided a reason for deletion except that you think it's stupid. Simongrey (talk) 21:32, November 24, 2012 (UTC) ::Okay fair enough. ? Since someone objects I'll just work around it. Ivorydoom (talk) 23:36, November 25, 2012 (UTC) :There should be some limit to the speculation section. At the moment it not only contradicts the main section, but cheerfully contradicts itself. The Caudicus and Haliax subsections are trivial and should be removed. You could rattle off more evidence for Alveron. Not that you should. It looks like Threpe was in there awhile ago. :The Character trinties section should be removed. Possibilities supported by the text are one thing, but those that require actively ignoring large chunks of it have no place on an informational page. :Cinder and Bredon have been put forth by many individuals across all the major discussions and several minor ones. However, the arguments against Cinder could conceivably be limited to "It is unclear whether he's capable of disguising his eyes." Thistlepong (talk) 07:46, December 12, 2012 (UTC) ::Hey Thistle - Glad to see you joined us over here, your expertise will be a great asset. (You should do the Ruach page!!...okay, I'll control myself...sorry for that outburst) ::I would support these edits if you wish to make them. Or I could do them as well. I agree the speculation is disasterous (obviously, I wanted to delete the whole damn thing) Ivorydoom (talk) 17:04, December 12, 2012 (UTC) The sign of the Chandrian wouldn't allow Cinder to walk into the Eolian unnoticed, can be rebutted by the fact that it was revealed that each Chandrian has different signs. We don't know which is Chandrian's due to the different names given by the Adem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.151.43.33 (talk • ) 20:58, January 2, 2013 :The Ademic poem states "Ferule, Chill and Dark of Eye" it's made fairly clear during the first scene with the chandrian that Cinder's true name is Ferula. The single letter difference is most likely due to translative differences between the languages used. You have to remember The Chandrian were quite likely speaking Aturan at the time Kvothe meets them, where as the poem from Shehyn is told in Ademic. :Though I agree that most likely Cinder could suppress these, similar to Bast, by using Glamoury. His signs are not nearly as noticeable as others. Also the Ctheah suggests the possiblity as well. Ivorydoom (talk) 23:06, January 2, 2013 (UTC) ::You know, there was no sense that Cinder's real name was ferula until the end of WMF. Up until that point it was just a spell from Harry Potter turned on its head, harming instead of healing. Maybe you should add that to the page? Thistlepong (talk) 01:34, January 3, 2013 (UTC)